Dear All

Sorry not to reply individually, but given that your messages arrived

virtually at the same time and carried, essentially, the same message, I

thought that you would forgive me if I did a group reply!

I do understand the sentiments expressed and I am sorry if the messages

you have received have been confused. Moving ahead on this matter has

been painfully slow, given the need to satisfy so many demands and to

consult so many. The matter has also come at a time, when for sound

financial reasons, the IEE is having to look very carefully at where it

spends its member's money. Running the competition in its present form

already costs about ?0k, so the bills involved are not trivial. Thus,

any case to continue the competition, in any format, will be looked at

carefully by the Finance Committee and Executive Board (These are, of

course, Member Committees - they make the decisions, not me!)

The situation is as follows:

A Working Party was established under the Chairmanship of Vice President

Dr Robert Gaitskill, with membership including a UK robotics expert

(Professor John Gray) and an active Younger Member, to review the

Micromouse competition. The Working Party interviewed many persons

actively involved with the competition and also representatives of the

IEE Educational Activities Department. Similar activities in Singapore

were discussed and it was noted how many exciting variants on the basic

theme had been introduced.

The Working Party concluded that the schools component of the event was

of great value as part of the IEE's extensive, long-term schools

programme. The rapid growth of this component of the competition over the

last few years showed that a serious interest could be created in

engineering through a competition like this. Concern, however, was

expressed about the senior components, given that very few Universities

were interested and that comparatively few entries were being received.

It was recognised that it was important that those involved should see

where the technology was going. It was thus important to encourage an

associated activity that could serve this purpose. This activity should

demonstrate the broader applications of the technology but should not

dominate the event.

As a result it is proposed that, following the 1999 final, the Micromouse

competition will be organised by the IEE's Educational Activities

Department (rather than the Knowledge Services Department), working in

association with the Young Engineers. (The IEE has been extremely

impressed with the other activities that are organised on this basis.).

Where existing organising groups are operating very effectively, such as

in South Wales, the arrangements would not change, but be supplemented by

the YE where necessary. The target would be to expand significantly the

competition and work towards at least 5 Regional finals, all brought

together in an overall final event. The Young Engineers will undertake

(in association with the IEE) extensive publicity for the event, expand

the Website, provide a team of virtual advisers (which they already do

for other competitions), organise the regional and national finals, etc.

The YE will also provide the secretariat for a small National Task Group

who will oversee the programme. This will include appropriate specialists

and IEE representatives. It is accepted that to ensure that the

competition remains relevant to the participants that there should be

demonstrations of where the technology can be used. This matter would be

debated by the Task Group at its first meeting.

The above recommendations have been approved by the IEE's Knowledge

Services Board and will be considered at the Executive Board meeting on

the 12th of July.

Given your very active support for the competition, I look forward to

discussing the situation further at the final in Exeter tomorrow.

Best wishes

Mike

Dr M G Rodd

Deputy Secretary

Institution of Electrical Engineers

Savoy Place

London WC2R 0BL